Linked by moondevil on Wed 11th Jul 2012 22:49 UTC
Mac OS X Ars Technica is reporting that certain 64bit Mac models won't be able to run Mountain Lion. The problem is the graphic card drivers; these are still 32bit, and Apple is unwilling to update them to 64bit. A 64bit kernel can't load 32bit drivers, so that's that. Apple has a list of supported models on their Mountain Lion upgrade page, so you can easily check if your computer is capable of running Mountain Lion.
Thread beginning with comment 526588
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: No biggie
by Delgarde on Fri 13th Jul 2012 00:13 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: No biggie"
Delgarde
Member since:
2008-08-19

Well, it can be considered a secret, since what Apple calls "EFI" only remotely complies with the EFI and UEFI specs and keeps doing weird undocumented stuff (such as overwriting kernels after boot) all the time.

Here are some examples :
http://mjg59.livejournal.com/132477.html
http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/12037.html


To be fair, if you follow Matthew's posts, it's clear that *nobody* remotely complies with the standards.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: No biggie
by phoudoin on Fri 13th Jul 2012 08:49 in reply to "RE[4]: No biggie"
phoudoin Member since:
2006-06-09

To be fair, if you follow Matthew's posts, it's clear that *nobody* remotely complies with the standards.


Indeed.

But only some manufacturers choose to keep private the non-standard-compliant/non disclosed features list. Many choose to publish it somehow in the hope that at least that may allow more people to find their product matching their needs.

Apple is not one of these later.
Worse, in they past they lock their hardware to only allow *their* operating system to run on it, now they lock softwares they don't want to run on their operating system.

I can see a pattern here.
Am I alone?

So, back to topic: either buy a new mac or stop rent your computing experience from Apple. You call.
But you were warning. Since long.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: No biggie
by Neolander on Fri 13th Jul 2012 10:14 in reply to "RE[4]: No biggie"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

My own impression from reading his blog was that most of current UEFI implementations have very serious bugs, but that no one but Apple has so far completely broken basic functionality such as OS detection ("You can can boot any EFI-compliant OS as long as it's Mac OS X") or the whole notion of boot-time services ("Here, do everything you want with that chunk of RAM, it's free for use after OS boot. The network chip may randomly decide to use it as a buffer from time to time though."). Seems like something done on purpose to me...

Edited 2012-07-13 10:20 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[6]: No biggie
by quackalist on Fri 13th Jul 2012 11:23 in reply to "RE[5]: No biggie"
quackalist Member since:
2007-08-27

...Seems like something done on purpose to me...


Never, how could you think such of Apple. I'm shocked!

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: No biggie
by zima on Mon 16th Jul 2012 01:27 in reply to "RE[4]: No biggie"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

To be fair, if you follow Matthew's posts, it's clear that *nobody* remotely complies with the standards.

I suppose it is a spectrum though ...if you follow them, who's the worst / mildest offender?

Reply Parent Score: 2